On 12 Dec 99, at 1:08, sbrown wrote: > I agree that all knowledge comes from God, but that reason is > more > 'linear' than circular. God gave us reason to understand his > universe. Because of sin, our reason cannot lead us to God. However, > the Holy Spirit can use reason to lead the unbeliever to Him. I'm not sure I would put it this way; it's better put to say that from the human side of things (which is the only side we see), it may look to us like "reason" is what brought somebody to God. But effectual calling is a supernatural event affecting not only the mind, but also the senses and emotions, which we'll never understand fully. > Reasonable arguments can be made for the existence of God, because God > has reasonably made his existence known (Romans 1:20). The definition > for good and evil can be reasonably obtained, through the Holy Spirit, > because God has written the law on our hearts (Romans 2:15). All > reasoning should lead straight to God, and this is what I mean by > linear reasoning. I think we're actually in agreement here: what I said was that all reasoning must begin and end with God, which makes it circular. Yes, all of our reasoning should lead straight to God--on a circle. In our natural state, we suppress that truth in unrighteousness. It's like holding a ball under a pool of water--it'll come up eventually when we can't hold on to it anymore, because it *should* float. We're holding it down, or suppressing it. > I'm taking an apologetics class right now, and we have read > "Apologetics to the Glory of God" by John Frame, a student of Van Til. > Personally, I think a better explanation of truth and reason is found > in "Classical Apologetics" by R.C. Sproul et al. Good book (the Frame book). :-) I have issues with Classical Apologetics. I think it's false to make the assumption that you can stand on neutral ground with the unbeliever and then prove the existence of God by giving various evidences. We've already stated that the unbeliever isn't on neutral ground: he's suppressing the truth in unrighteousness. So why should we go stand where he is? It's like saying we'll temporarily become an agnostic in order to prove Christianity. No. Christianity is the truth, and what we need to do is show how an unbeliever's worldview is internally inconsistent. In other words, a worldview without God falls apart. Because we're God's creatures, we can't even reason properly without God. Unbelievers have to borrow from the Christian worldview to make sense of anything. Think about it: say an unbeliever's child is murdered. The unbeliever has absolutely nothing to say about it, because under his worldview, what does it matter if one bag of proteins and cells does away with another bag of proteins and cells? Unbelievers have to be shown that their rebellion is a *moral* or *spiritual* rebellion, not a "reasonable" theological or intellectual position. Deep down, they only hold to this position because they don't want to be accountable to God. They need to be shown that they can't even think without first presupposing God's existence. That's the beauty of presuppositional apologetics over classical apologetics. It proves the existence of not just some theoretical "creator," but the Christian God, and it doesn't need any external evidences to do it. You can pile up as much evidence as is humanly possible, and still people won't believe, because people aren't *reasonable*. The guards who saw the stone rolled away from Jesus' tomb didn't instantly believe. Even all people who were healed during Jesus' ministry didn't believe. In Luke 17:11-19, ten lepers were healed, but only one returned to give glory to God. What better evidence for God's existence could there be than to have God Himself personally heal an ailment like leprosy? Yet one believed out of ten. Evidence alone is not the answer. You need to use evidence along with presuppositional apologetics to provide a really convincing argument. That way, you hit them in all areas: heart, emotions, mind. And, of course, none of this will work unless God changes an unbeliever's heart. But I probably didn't need to say that. :-) P.S. My sister-in-law goes to Gordon. Her email address is @peace.gordon.edu also. Her name is Rebekah Kostas; maybe you know her? -- Rich Sezov Home: sezov@... http://www.lightspring.com http://www.jersey.net/~sezov DragonRaid Resources: http://www.lightspring.com/draid Providence OPC: http://www.providenceopc.org